Now, in New World you have to opt into Faction conflicts and Wars for territory ownership. Amazon Game Studios said doing so will be extremely rewarding, with in-game bonuses and rewards up for grabs. This new system is called PvP War, a 50 versus 50 PvP battle "by appointment"
Keywords>EXTREMELY rewarding.So this is really saying you MUST pvp or you will have a lesser experience from the game.So although it might not be forced,in a way it really is forced pvp.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Now, in New World you have to opt into Faction conflicts and Wars for territory ownership. Amazon Game Studios said doing so will be extremely rewarding, with in-game bonuses and rewards up for grabs. This new system is called PvP War, a 50 versus 50 PvP battle "by appointment"
Keywords>EXTREMELY rewarding.So this is really saying you MUST pvp or you will have a lesser experience from the game.So although it might not be forced,in a way it really is forced pvp.
Right now you gain an extra 10% xp. Not what I would consider worth the extra risk and at max level is obviously useless. The only reason to flag is if your leaving town with the intent of trying to kill someone. If your going to go gather or farm or whatever flagging just puts you at a disadvantage to pve players. There has been a tremendous amount of negative feedback over the lack of incentives and rewards for open world pvp between factions and we may have gotten through. Only time will tell.
They can increase it to even 20% ain't an incentive for me. So those people who enjoy it, will flag up.
Now, in New World you have to opt into Faction conflicts and Wars for territory ownership. Amazon Game Studios said doing so will be extremely rewarding, with in-game bonuses and rewards up for grabs. This new system is called PvP War, a 50 versus 50 PvP battle "by appointment"
Keywords>EXTREMELY rewarding.So this is really saying you MUST pvp or you will have a lesser experience from the game.So although it might not be forced,in a way it really is forced pvp.
Right now you gain an extra 10% xp. Not what I would consider worth the extra risk and at max level is obviously useless. The only reason to flag is if your leaving town with the intent of trying to kill someone. If your going to go gather or farm or whatever flagging just puts you at a disadvantage to pve players. There has been a tremendous amount of negative feedback over the lack of incentives and rewards for open world pvp between factions and we may have gotten through. Only time will tell.
They can increase it to even 20% ain't an incentive for me. So those people who enjoy it, will flag up.
Instead of appealing to the players that weren't going to play their game in the first place. Why didn't they just design ways to stop the parts of the game that were making the players leave. They could have made a better system.
This new iteration isn't going to please neither PvP nor PvE players. It's like the proverb "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush', they should have stuck with their audience.
We will see, I guess. Yes, CC is usually horrible in pvp games, and allows for many 'easy mode' classes. I played a lot of mmorprgs (started original UO) on pvp servers (if 2 server sets), and the latest one was Archeage since release. I have come to believe that these devs will just keep screwing up pvp games balance/abilities. Add to that p2w shops, and I am not too thrilled with the games that have been coming out for years. I haven't heard much on this games shop. The pvp rewards/list sounded like their was a lot of room for a group of people freezing everyone out, and if they make it good rewards, hoarding it all. Not having a lot of faith in things I have read, but I will wait to see what they end up doing, since I am not playing anything right now (Lack of new content in AA, so not playing).
If PVP was popular, why would you have to give incentives greater than PVE zones? Its obvious PVP MMOs is a losing concept. They have to have some PVE just to pull people in.
Here is a thought, why don't they give greater incentives to PVE zones, make resources 2x or 3x more? LOL there would be zero people in PVP zones then. Just shows PVP zones are dead without OP incentives.
If PVP was popular, why would you have to give incentives greater than PVE zones? Its obvious PVP MMOs is a losing concept. They have to have some PVE just to pull people in.
Here is a thought, why don't they give greater incentives to PVE zones, make resources 2x or 3x more? LOL there would be zero people in PVP zones then. Just shows PVP zones are dead without OP incentives.
The same reason they give incentives for PvE, because progression is important.
PvP is harder and less consistent than PvE so the rewards are either greater or overall different. There's nothing overly challenging about farming PvE mobs. Fighting another person is a different story.
I don't know if the PvP rewards in this game are greater than the PvE rewards, but there's a reason if it was.
I am making a good salary from home $1200-$2500/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it's my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here For MORE INFO PLEASE Just check this SITE..............https://bit.ly/3fYOoIQ
What's the story behind these spammers? Do they get a pay per click if you navigate to the site?
The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward. The question is why does PVP NEED to have larger rewards than PVE. People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP is like alot like WORK to most people. You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.
Essentially you are paying PVEers to be deer for a small percent of hunters. Why wont these hunters farm other hunters of equal skill?
In PVE the content is the fun part, incentives are an extra bonus (like a hobby/game), which is why they dont need to add extra incentives more than PVP.
Isn't required pvp the same as forced? You are barely even playing the game and getting nowhere without pvp.Well your alternative is to join a powerful guild and be one of the few within that doesn't take part but then like i said,you will barely be playing the game at that point. I don't even know how their 50-50 is going to work,what if you don't have 50 players?What if your guild was fast and got a nice spot and don't want to pvp ...ever? The only term i have seen is the term "challenge"you can challenge another fort,that doesn't mean they must accept,or does it?
Since they are steadfast on the claim there is no FORCED pvp that means your guild/fort never have to accept a challenge ever,does it not?
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Isn't required pvp the same as forced? You are barely even playing the game and getting nowhere without pvp.Well your alternative is to join a powerful guild and be one of the few within that doesn't take part but then like i said,you will barely be playing the game at that point. I don't even know how their 50-50 is going to work,what if you don't have 50 players?What if your guild was fast and got a nice spot and don't want to pvp ...ever? The only term i have seen is the term "challenge"you can challenge another fort,that doesn't mean they must accept,or does it?
Since they are steadfast on the claim there is no FORCED pvp that means your guild/fort never have to accept a challenge ever,does it not?
When a territory is weakened it becomes vulnerable to attack. If another faction then declares war on that territory the defenders get to pick a time window for when the siege will take place, but they cannot simply ignore the challenge. An individual player or guild can of course choose not to participate in the fight for the territory.
The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward. The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE. People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people. You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.
FTFY.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward. The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE. People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people. You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.
FTFY.
Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players.
Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.
The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.
So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward. The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE. People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people. You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.
FTFY.
Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players.
Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.
The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.
So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
Well here's the thing about looking at this without a PVP or PVE bias: it is not about providing easy kills to PvPers it's about having unique things that a certain type of player has easy access to that players who don't do that type of content won't. Raiding is no different.
I have zero problems with those systems as long as the resources or items in question are not made bind on pick up and can be freely traded in the AH giving raiders and PvPers a unique economic niche advantage and players who want nothing to do with either of those things access to the resources or items.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward. The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE. People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people. You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.
FTFY.
Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players.
Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.
The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.
So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
Well here's the thing about looking at this without a PVP or PVE bias: it is not about providing easy kills to PvPers it's about having unique things that a certain type of player has easy access to that players who don't do that type of content won't. Raiding is no different.
I have zero problems with those systems as long as the resources or items in question are not made bind on pick up and can be freely traded in the AH giving raiders and PvPers a unique economic niche advantage and players who want nothing to do with either of those things access to the resources or items.
Every choice a developer makes is to encourage certain game play. Whether it ultimately succeeds is beyond their control.
However I can bet the spots where those resources spawn will be camped by players in stealth waiting for easy kills. That is how the content ends up being used as. It does not matter what the developer wanted it will be what the player decides and goodness me I would not want to stifle a player's creativity in how they want to use that content.
I have played PvP games where resources are in PvP areas. I have gone there to get it. I didn't enjoy it one bit and why you might ask is it different from avoiding mobs when I go to a high level area to harvest. I can expect the high level mob to behave in a certain way and I cannot predict how a real player might behave. To a player that enjoys PvP that is the fun and joy of it to me it is a horrible deterrent.
The fundamental difference many PvP players cannot understand is why a PvE player cannot accept things the way they can. This is exactly why you should not force these types players together. Many people fall in the areas of the Venn diagram where both sides overlap. Those players are comfortable playing both types of games. Forget the idea that if you make it so they cannot avoid those areas the PvE player will somehow end up enjoying the PvP. All it did for me was dislike it even more.
Trying to cater to every type of player is the real problem here.
The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward. The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE. People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people. You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.
FTFY.
Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players.
Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.
The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.
So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
Well here's the thing about looking at this without a PVP or PVE bias: it is not about providing easy kills to PvPers it's about having unique things that a certain type of player has easy access to that players who don't do that type of content won't. Raiding is no different.
I have zero problems with those systems as long as the resources or items in question are not made bind on pick up and can be freely traded in the AH giving raiders and PvPers a unique economic niche advantage and players who want nothing to do with either of those things access to the resources or items.
Every choice a developer makes is to encourage certain game play. Whether it ultimately succeeds is beyond their control.
However I can bet the spots where those resources spawn will be camped by players in stealth waiting for easy kills. That is how the content ends up being used as. It does not matter what the developer wanted it will be what the player decides and goodness me I would not want to stifle a player's creativity in how they want to use that content.
I have played PvP games where resources are in PvP areas. I have gone there to get it. I didn't enjoy it one bit and why you might ask is it different from avoiding mobs when I go to a high level area to harvest. I can expect the high level mob to behave in a certain way and I cannot predict how a real player might behave. To a player that enjoys PvP that is the fun and joy of it to me it is a horrible deterrent.
The fundamental difference many PvP players cannot understand is why a PvE player cannot accept things the way they can. This is exactly why you should not force these types players together. Many people fall in the areas of the Venn diagram where both sides overlap. Those players are comfortable playing both types of games. Forget the idea that if you make it so they cannot avoid those areas the PvE player will somehow end up enjoying the PvP. All it did for me was dislike it even more.
Trying to cater to every type of player is the real problem here.
Well I enjoy both although as I have stated many times here, I don't enjoy open world PvP everywhere. I want it in separate zones like DAoC, ESO and others do it so when the mood strikes me I can do one type without another player imposing his preferred style on me.
If I want an item that comes only from PvP and I'm not in the mood I just buy it... works for me.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
If PVP was popular, why would you have to give incentives greater than PVE zones? Its obvious PVP MMOs is a losing concept. They have to have some PVE just to pull people in.
Here is a thought, why don't they give greater incentives to PVE zones, make resources 2x or 3x more? LOL there would be zero people in PVP zones then. Just shows PVP zones are dead without OP incentives.
The same reason they give incentives for PvE, because progression is important.
PvP is harder and less consistent than PvE so the rewards are either greater or overall different. There's nothing overly challenging about farming PvE mobs. Fighting another person is a different story.
I don't know if the PvP rewards in this game are greater than the PvE rewards, but there's a reason if it was.
So why have incentives at all? Just let players play how they wish? If they want to PvP, than they can make a PvP character and PvP other PvP players. The whole point is, not every PvE player wants to have to PvP. At the same time, you could reward PvP players based on how good they are. Such as lootable currency from killed players used to buy better gear.
As mentioned above, why does anything aspect beyond standard questing/PvE have incentives? In most games, you have to go on a raid to get the best gear and most of the time you have to do that raid many times before getting what you want making it incredibly repetitive. Why have those incentives at all?
In reality, a game with basic PvE and nothing else, where all the best loot would randomly drop off trash mobs, would be a boring game.
I always preferred separate loot/rewards. I enjoy PVP myself and never minded when games had gear or items that were rewarded in PVP but did not work in raids. "Gain XX amount of damage when flagged for PVP". I always thought this was a way to reward the players who do prefer to PVP but it was not hurting those who had no interest. I also think cosmetics matter in games regardless of how many people say they don't care. Over and over again in games we see cosmetics sell and many players wanting their toon to look a certain way. Making PVE and PVP drops have different cosmetic looks imo is a way to get someone to play both as well. It is not a reward that changes the game what so ever but it does make the player who wants that specific look or pet engage in something they usually don't to make it happen.
I disagree that PVE is made for the fun of doing the raid and quest and the rewards are just a bonus. If a raid boss has a small % chance to drop a piece of gear that I need I will continue to do that boss until I get the gear. Once myself and the guild have that gear we most likely won't do that boss anymore. If that took us 6 months to all get the gear then so be it. But we were not doing it for "fun", we did it for the reward and once we all received the reward we stopped. It is fun the first or second time imo.
Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players.
Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.
The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.
So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
The increased rewards, both for raiding and for PVP, are not there to reward playstyle choice or preference (which is what you point as the difference). They are there to reward increased challenge and potentially risk. Rejecting this implies you do not want to reward players porportionately for their efforts in a multiplayer game. In this context, substituting one word for the other is fine.
That only works if it is a PvP game and the rewards are for PvP players only. If it is mixed game where the developers are trying to force the PvE players to go to the PvP zones then it is not the same as rewarding a PvP player now is it? You're basically forcing the PvE players to go the zones that have the resources. The increased rewards should affect all players equally. However the PvE players are facing a risk they have no wish to take and are ill equipped for. Raiding isn't approached with the same mind set and if it does I would question my engagement.
Therefore you are not rewarding the PvE players anything because they are going there for the resources which isn't a reward. Resources are not rewards unlike Raid loot. They could become part of raid loot where some games place some resources in raid areas but they are not the same as Raid loot. Loot is loot and resources are not loot. There is a difference.
I maintain you cannot compare a raid to killing easy targets that have no wish to participate in PvP. There is no equal comparison between raiding and randomly killing of some sod mining in a PvP zone. Therefore substituting 'raid' for 'PvP' doesn't work in this context and for that matter in any game involving two completely different playstyles. Mixing them by the contrived placement of resources is an insult to a PvE player but I am willing to do it if there are other things the game offers.
I would agree that it would be rewarding if the developers specifically rewarded the PvE players with actual loot for going to PvP zones to provide content for the PvP players. Now that would be something don't you think?
All this discussion is of little value unless developers respect the chosen play style of their players instead of trying to capture a larger market share by going after the PvE players. They do this and then think up ways to make the game palatable to the PvE players who wouldn't bother to play their game but it merely creates resentment and unhappiness.
I witnessed this very thing in Aion and quit soon after when I realised how they tricked me. I am not going to go and complain or anything on their forums since it was my own naivety that I should place the blame on but these days I research a game and decide what risks I wish to take. I play PvP games within my parameters and comfort zone.
Games that do not tempt me or provide me with enough security from PvP I avoid.
Developers have admitted that to encourage PvP they place higher tier resources in PvP zones.
That guy from Albion Online said as much.
The problem is the developers ask and encourage players who are not keen on PvP to play their games by giving them false assurances. Bless Online even gave PvE players the option to purchase immunity items from their real money shop which admittedly was a pretty scummy thing to do but something they considered and used.
It isn't about the players who don't mind PvP, they are fine with it. It is the dishonesty that developers practice to increase the population of their games. You're mistaken because I have read interviews where developers admitted one method to ensure and encourage PvP adverse players from considering and participating in PvP was to place resources or high value dungeons in those areas. It is a known tactic.
In Dark Age of Camelot which has a lot of areas that are only for PvE but they made a very lucrative dungeon (Darkness Falls I think it is called ) in a PvP area. Although in that game most of the PvP is actually in another zone they did it to encourage more participation from PvE players who want to try their hand at PvP. This was what they thought might ease players averse to PvP to try PvP, it is not an unknown motive and one developers have used in many games.
They did exactly this in Aion too and it pissed a lot of the PvE players enough because those zones were constantly camped by high level players waiting to kill us and we had no chance against their levels.
I think you aren't aware of this because you have no problem with PvP but since I do and have played in these games where the expectation and the actual reality were vastly different and participated in many discussions on the forums for those games I have a very keen memory of the reasons those resources were placed in those zones in Aion.
Answer me this then, if it isn't to lure PvE players why did New World make the changes they did ?
Isn't required pvp the same as forced? You are barely even playing the game and getting nowhere without pvp.Well your alternative is to join a powerful guild and be one of the few within that doesn't take part but then like i said,you will barely be playing the game at that point. I don't even know how their 50-50 is going to work,what if you don't have 50 players?What if your guild was fast and got a nice spot and don't want to pvp ...ever? The only term i have seen is the term "challenge"you can challenge another fort,that doesn't mean they must accept,or does it?
Since they are steadfast on the claim there is no FORCED pvp that means your guild/fort never have to accept a challenge ever,does it not?
When a territory is weakened it becomes vulnerable to attack. If another faction then declares war on that territory the defenders get to pick a time window for when the siege will take place, but they cannot simply ignore the challenge. An individual player or guild can of course choose not to participate in the fight for the territory.
The funny part is if your guild spends the day running faction missions to put a specific territory into a conflicted state so you can declare war... ANY company in your faction (even 1 man alt guilds from other factions) can sign up to declare war. Every company that signs up is put into a vanguard lottery where the company that actually gets to do the war declaration and siege is chosen completely random. The system is so broke.
Is there any benefit to being the vanguard other than just getting to choose/recruit who fights in the War?
Comments
Keywords>EXTREMELY rewarding.So this is really saying you MUST pvp or you will have a lesser experience from the game.So although it might not be forced,in a way it really is forced pvp.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
This new iteration isn't going to please neither PvP nor PvE players. It's like the proverb "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush', they should have stuck with their audience.
Essentially you are paying PVEers to be deer for a small percent of hunters. Why wont these hunters farm other hunters of equal skill?
In PVE the content is the fun part, incentives are an extra bonus (like a hobby/game), which is why they dont need to add extra incentives more than PVP.
You are barely even playing the game and getting nowhere without pvp.Well your alternative is to join a powerful guild and be one of the few within that doesn't take part but then like i said,you will barely be playing the game at that point.
I don't even know how their 50-50 is going to work,what if you don't have 50 players?What if your guild was fast and got a nice spot and don't want to pvp ...ever?
The only term i have seen is the term "challenge"you can challenge another fort,that doesn't mean they must accept,or does it?
Since they are steadfast on the claim there is no FORCED pvp that means your guild/fort never have to accept a challenge ever,does it not?
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
When a territory is weakened it becomes vulnerable to attack. If another faction then declares war on that territory the defenders get to pick a time window for when the siege will take place, but they cannot simply ignore the challenge. An individual player or guild can of course choose not to participate in the fight for the territory.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players.
Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.
The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.
So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
I have zero problems with those systems as long as the resources or items in question are not made bind on pick up and can be freely traded in the AH giving raiders and PvPers a unique economic niche advantage and players who want nothing to do with either of those things access to the resources or items.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
However I can bet the spots where those resources spawn will be camped by players in stealth waiting for easy kills. That is how the content ends up being used as. It does not matter what the developer wanted it will be what the player decides and goodness me I would not want to stifle a player's creativity in how they want to use that content.
I have played PvP games where resources are in PvP areas. I have gone there to get it. I didn't enjoy it one bit and why you might ask is it different from avoiding mobs when I go to a high level area to harvest. I can expect the high level mob to behave in a certain way and I cannot predict how a real player might behave. To a player that enjoys PvP that is the fun and joy of it to me it is a horrible deterrent.
The fundamental difference many PvP players cannot understand is why a PvE player cannot accept things the way they can. This is exactly why you should not force these types players together. Many people fall in the areas of the Venn diagram where both sides overlap. Those players are comfortable playing both types of games. Forget the idea that if you make it so they cannot avoid those areas the PvE player will somehow end up enjoying the PvP. All it did for me was dislike it even more.
Trying to cater to every type of player is the real problem here.
If I want an item that comes only from PvP and I'm not in the mood I just buy it... works for me.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
As mentioned above, why does anything aspect beyond standard questing/PvE have incentives? In most games, you have to go on a raid to get the best gear and most of the time you have to do that raid many times before getting what you want making it incredibly repetitive. Why have those incentives at all?
I disagree that PVE is made for the fun of doing the raid and quest and the rewards are just a bonus. If a raid boss has a small % chance to drop a piece of gear that I need I will continue to do that boss until I get the gear. Once myself and the guild have that gear we most likely won't do that boss anymore. If that took us 6 months to all get the gear then so be it. But we were not doing it for "fun", we did it for the reward and once we all received the reward we stopped. It is fun the first or second time imo.
Legends - Heroes fade..Legends last Forever
Therefore you are not rewarding the PvE players anything because they are going there for the resources which isn't a reward. Resources are not rewards unlike Raid loot. They could become part of raid loot where some games place some resources in raid areas but they are not the same as Raid loot. Loot is loot and resources are not loot. There is a difference.
I maintain you cannot compare a raid to killing easy targets that have no wish to participate in PvP. There is no equal comparison between raiding and randomly killing of some sod mining in a PvP zone. Therefore substituting 'raid' for 'PvP' doesn't work in this context and for that matter in any game involving two completely different playstyles. Mixing them by the contrived placement of resources is an insult to a PvE player but I am willing to do it if there are other things the game offers.
I would agree that it would be rewarding if the developers specifically rewarded the PvE players with actual loot for going to PvP zones to provide content for the PvP players. Now that would be something don't you think?
I witnessed this very thing in Aion and quit soon after when I realised how they tricked me. I am not going to go and complain or anything on their forums since it was my own naivety that I should place the blame on but these days I research a game and decide what risks I wish to take. I play PvP games within my parameters and comfort zone.
Games that do not tempt me or provide me with enough security from PvP I avoid.
That guy from Albion Online said as much.
The problem is the developers ask and encourage players who are not keen on PvP to play their games by giving them false assurances. Bless Online even gave PvE players the option to purchase immunity items from their real money shop which admittedly was a pretty scummy thing to do but something they considered and used.
It isn't about the players who don't mind PvP, they are fine with it. It is the dishonesty that developers practice to increase the population of their games. You're mistaken because I have read interviews where developers admitted one method to ensure and encourage PvP adverse players from considering and participating in PvP was to place resources or high value dungeons in those areas. It is a known tactic.
In Dark Age of Camelot which has a lot of areas that are only for PvE but they made a very lucrative dungeon (Darkness Falls I think it is called ) in a PvP area. Although in that game most of the PvP is actually in another zone they did it to encourage more participation from PvE players who want to try their hand at PvP. This was what they thought might ease players averse to PvP to try PvP, it is not an unknown motive and one developers have used in many games.
They did exactly this in Aion too and it pissed a lot of the PvE players enough because those zones were constantly camped by high level players waiting to kill us and we had no chance against their levels.
I think you aren't aware of this because you have no problem with PvP but since I do and have played in these games where the expectation and the actual reality were vastly different and participated in many discussions on the forums for those games I have a very keen memory of the reasons those resources were placed in those zones in Aion.
Answer me this then, if it isn't to lure PvE players why did New World make the changes they did ?
OWPvP only shines if the entire game is designed for it.
Is there any benefit to being the vanguard other than just getting to choose/recruit who fights in the War?